Hi Allen,
Since this thread was referred to by the simple modules thread, here
are some remarks.
On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 7:43 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
allen.wirfs-br...@microsoft.com wrote:
One of the points that I recall is the importance of not entangling “module
management” with “configuration
Reading over my comments, I realized I could summarize:
Configuration management is just as important to the integrity of the
code in modules as the code itself. Getting the wrong version of
some important library can break your code just as badly as having a
bug in your own code. With that,
-Original Message-
From: ihab.a...@gmail.com [mailto:ihab.a...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 12:52 PM
...
I don't have an issue per se with whether module IDs are string
literals or not, but just to guide where this is going, I'd like to
propose a candidate goal: The
From: Allen Wirfs-Brock allen.wirfs-br...@microsoft.com
To: es-discuss@mozilla.org es-discuss@mozilla.org
Sent: Sat, January 30, 2010 11:43:39 AM
Subject: simple modules: module managment vs. configuration management
There is quite a bit of literature on “2nd class”
module systems, but most
There is quite a bit of literature on “2nd class” module systems, but
most of it is from a period before first class modules became the
primary modularity research interest. I’ll see if I can dig up some
references to papers that may be helpful.
That would be great. I'll be glad to include
5 matches
Mail list logo
